“Apple is not above the laws of the United States, nor should anyone or any company be above the laws. To have a court warrant granted, and Apple say they are still not going to cooperate is really wrong.” – California Senator Dianne Feinstein
“It (Apple iPhone) is a deeply personal device. It is an extension of ourselves.” — Apple CEO Tim Cook
Apple desperately needs an attitude adjustment.
It’s past time to cooperate, Tim Cook.
How about right NOW?
And yet the Fortune 500 CEO walked off stage yesterday to the lyrics of Tom Petty’s “I Won’t Back Down.”
The terrorists who struck Brussels this morning, killing at least 30 and injuring 100 more, won’t back down either.
As an Apple shareholder (the stock is up this morning) and most importantly a strong proponent for safety, the author of Almost DailyBrett is joining the bi-partisan chorus calling for the company to fully comply with federal magistrate court order and unlock the secrets contained in a terrorist’s stolen cell phone.
What is particularly galling is the arrogant notion that a device is an extension of ourselves, and defines who we are.
Really?
Your author lived for almost six decades and managed to get by just fine without an Apple iPhone.
Public Relations Disaster
Did we have to get to this point?
Why did the relationship between Apple with the strongest brand in the world and the legendary Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have to degenerate into a public battle of wills with privacy being claimed on one side and safety being championed on the other?
The issue comes down to a County of San Bernardino owned iPhone 5 being used by a terrorist couple to kill 14 people and injure 22 more last December. What are the secrets contained in the encrypted smart phone used by Syed Rizwan Farook?
How can the FBI and by extension the people of this nation unlock this cell phone without permanently erasing the data contained in this device (10 unsuccessful tries triggers the elimination of all content)?
Why couldn’t über-secret Apple quietly and confidentially, particularly in the face of a legitimate court warrant, write the code allowing the FBI to unlock this particular phone?
Couldn’t Apple have complied on a sub-rosa basis and keep those who think Edward Snowden is a swell guy happy at the same time? Why the public spectacle on CBS’ 60 Minutes and elsewhere that grows more intense and intransigent on a daily basis?
Just this week, the Department of Justice announced it may have a fix that allows the FBI to hack into the phone without inadvertently erasing the data. Is the FBI bluffing, trying to force Apple’s hand?
And will the spectre being played out on TV and mobile device screens from Brussels this morning, prompt a little soul-searching at Apple?
According to former Fortune technology columnist (and Apple apologist), David Kirkpatrick, the ISIS-coordinated attacks on the EU’s capital airport and central rail station, will have zero impact on the board room stance at Apple.
Alas, he is probably correct. A quick glance at the company’s news releases this morning offers plenty of details about the Apple iPhone SE and a new and improved iPad.
If you are expecting reflection, contemplation and refreshing change from Apple’s defiant attitude as a result of today’s deadly terrorist attacks, you are sadly mistaken.
The needless Apple public relations disaster continues.
http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Feinstein-says-Apple-is-wrong-to-refuse-to-6843414.php
http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/02/17/senator-dianne-feinstein-intelligence-cmte-lead-intv.cnn
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2016-03-22/how-will-terror-attacks-impact-apple-vs-fbi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUTXb-ga1fo
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fbi-may-have-found-way-to-unlock-san-bernardino-shooters-iphone/
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-san-bernardino-shooting-live-updates-htmlstory.html
Kevin – I think you are correct that there were so many opportunities to do a better job here. To me, Apple is talking out both sides at best. Apple has accommodated Chinese authorities to have user data in China stored and with questionable access by Chinese authorities within China. Apple had to concede this to get into the Chinese market. It’s hard for me to buy their argument that the phone is an extension of the person in denying to help fight clear terrorism while simultaneously allowing user data in China to be questionably filtered. I see a company who wants front page news, but hasn’t won that space with innovation for several years now. When the latest product announcements continue to be revisions of previous products and an awful lot like what competitors have kicked out (Samsung), I think less of that company. Weak-sauce argument Apple!
Agree with you, Dan. My blog today was written in hopes that a little reflection (e.g., Brussels attacks … FBI may be able to unlock the phone anyway) would prompt a re-evaluation in Cupertino. I’m afraid that Tim Cook’s old-fashioned stubbornness and the influence of Edward Snowden will hold sway. Nonetheless, this entire saga is an unmitigated PR disaster for Apple. All the best, Kevin